Thursday, December 6, 2007

[music] Bright Eyes - When The President Talks To God

Here's an old freebie that actually predates this site! I remember downloading this before I started blogging all the free downloads available from iTunes, and surprisingly it's still available.

Genre: Alternative

Download for Free!

the fine print: Downloads are usually free for ~1 week after they've been posted. After that, you'll have to pay for them. Sorry! You snooze, you lose.

17 comments:

FreeiPodGuy.com said...

I'm not sure what to make of this. Previously, this song was free for 294 days, many times longer than the 7 days reserved for most free tracks. Now it's up again--an indicator of Apple politics?

My previous blog posts on this:

July 24, 2005

November 16, 2005

Gene said...

Apple should not even consider having this garbage on their site. It is irreligious, un-American and not even anywhere near art, music or what ever. But for those with greed in their heart, (Apple) it is "Good Business." This is something our enemies and the enemies of God will appreciate.
Colossians 3:4

Urgack said...

@ Gene:

A) Separation of Church and State, a fundamental principle of this country, is no upheld. President Bush uses religion in nearly all of his undertakings, and as this country's leader, that is not right.

B) It is unconstitutional not to question your government. You call it "Un-American", but the very act of questioning is what this country is based on. Democracy ensures that there is always someone to question what our leaders are doing.

C) How is this an act of greed on Apple's part? They are giving the song away for free... I think you may need to recheck the definition of greed.

D) Get F*cked.

geckomon said...

@ urgack

A. Sez who? Or better yet which document? (Hint: It certainly is not in the Constitution of the United States.)

B. So if I decide not to question my government, I'm being unconstitutional? Please explain.

C. One out of four.

D. Stay classy, urgack, stay classy.

desmo_mojo said...

A. US Constitution, Article VI, section 3: "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
Bill of Rights, 1st Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...."
Yep, it's there. It is obvious the Founders were keen to ensure we established no "state religion" or favored one over another, there is nothing to suggest a religious man cant hold office or be "guided" by his religious beliefs. So.. you are both wrong.
B. We all have the right to question OR not question. Neither is unconstitutional or un-American, freedom baby!
C. Not greed, maybe political, but that is their right.
D. Play nice people.
Gene, quoting scripture does NOT make your argument any stronger. Do you live your life by the rules set forth in Leviticus? Didn't think so.

Stephen said...

I think it's a genuinely good song. Conor Oberst is among the best modern songwriters. Maybe not his best work, but still good.

And for those of you who don't believe in Jefferson's wall of separation, read the fucking first amendment. Additionally, it's "We the PEOPLE of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union" not "God." Every time the founders proposed adding religious language to the constitution, it failed.

Anonymous said...

there are no gods/God. get over it people.

geckomon said...

@ desmo_mojo

First, your are very correct when advising gene as to his bible quoting. The bible was not written for non-believers. Why cite a source of enlightenment that requires a Christian belief as a prerequisite? I'll never understand scripture recital as a persuasive tool for the non-Christian.

Second, there is no document that mentions or implies a separation between "church and state." It has been a misinterpretation of the First Amendment that this incorrect translation comes from. Here it is in it's entirety:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Isn't it interesting what is left out when the so called "separation" issue is injected into a conversation? And it speaks of creating laws, not representation. This, however, is the debate that goes on right now and is constantly being deliberated by the courts these days.

The President's practice of his religion is actually protected by the Constitution.

The reasons why this song is so bad are on many fronts; the nut root factor notwithstanding.
Some (but not all):
One, it's ignorant of a persons personal faith.
Two, the lyrics are bad and juvenile.
Three, it is immature to attack someone on false pretenses and imagined facts.

Bright Eyes ain't being too bright. At least Dylan had some powerful lyrics and catchy tunes in his songs of protest. Bright Eyes will not be remembered.

geckomon said...

By the way, I want to express my gratitude to supastar k3v for keeping me current on the weekly downloads. Especially the ones not directly advertised!

Thanks dude!

Michael said...

@ geckoman:

The Treaty of Tripoli states, and I'm quoting nearly exactly: "The United States of America is not in any way founded on the Christian religion." That's right. Did you know that most of the founders were NOT Christians, but rather skeptics and Deists?

What makes you think that America is supposed to be religious, other than the first amendment that says we're allowed to practice whatever religion we choose without Congress passing laws against us?

I fully agree with urgack.

geckomon said...

@michael

It is a general rule that when replying to a person in a comment forum, that you reply according to what was said.

Not once did I say that the United States was founded on the Christian Religion. Not once did I insinuate or state that the our founders were Christian, nor did I try to allude to their spiritual convictions.

You have made up context to fit your rant and placed subject matter where there was none.

To begin with, I commented on the Church and State concept that is misrepresented in urgack's statement about the President.

Second, I also picked on the fact that urgack stated: "It is unconstitutional not to question your government." Please, that's an easy one!

Third, I gave him credit for the greed vs free clarity he gave gene.

Fourth, I was snarky to the fact that ultimately his last point of contention was out of line and not necessary.

It would seem your opinion of Christianity has clouded your ability to reason and debate.

sndo said...

maybe Gene was kidding. I sure hope he is. If he's for real... wow... I'm sure glad I'm not American.

Anonymous said...

God is wonderful, but God has little to do with modern religion and nothing to do with human politics, and exists whether you believe nor not. America is wonderful because you have the freedom not to believe what you're told, but to figure it out for yourself based upon your own experience.

This song is less than wonderful -- but it doesn't suck, either, and it's free.

Anonymous said...

Two notes on this odd debate. #1 if you are Atheists why are you offended by something you don't believe in? It seems quite odd to me to even bother raising any points against something you don't think exists. If you're going to be that offended about things you don't think exist I imagine you should also be angry about fairies, unicorns, dragons, smurfs, and ogres. It also seems to me that one chooses weather to be offended by something or not. You know what offends me? Offended people. Secondly if you are some other sort of theist or agnostic the Founding Fathers (whom were the 55 who signed the Declaration of Independence) most certainly had been Christian in the Majority. The denominational affiliations of these men were a matter of public record. Among the delegates were 28 Episcopalians, 8 Presbyterians, 7 Congregationalists, 2 Lutherans, 2 Dutch Reformed, 2 Methodists, 2 Roman Catholics, 1 unknown, and only 3 deists--Williamson, Wilson, and Franklin--this at a time when church membership entailed a sworn public confession of biblical faith.

Even Franklin the deist is equivocal. He was raised in a Puritan family and later adopted then abandoned deism. Though not an orthodox Christian, it was 81-year-old Franklin's emotional call to humble prayer on June 28, 1787, that was the turning point for a hopelessly stalled Convention. James Madison recorded the event in his collection of notes and debates from the Federal Convention. Franklin's appeal contained no less than four direct references to Scripture.

And have we forgotten that powerful Friend? Or do we imagine that we no longer need His assistance? I have lived, sir, a long time and the longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth: that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been assured, sir, in the sacred writings that 'except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it.' I firmly believe this and I also believe that without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel.

Three of the four cornerstones of the Constitution--Franklin, Washington, and Madison--were firmly rooted in Christianity. But what about Thomas Jefferson? His signature cannot be found at the end of the Constitution, but his voice permeates the entire document.
The language it's self in the Constitution says that the Government will not Establish a state or federal religion not that church and state would be separated to the point that one could not have or voice their own religious views weather or not they are offensive to others.

sndo said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Michael said...

Washington's firmness in Christianity is debatable. Yes, he was an Episcopalian, but history suggests that his ideas, as well as the ideas of many other founding fathers, were strongly rooted in Deism. They held strongly to the ideas of Deist philosophers such as Voltaire and Locke. Their idea of liberty itself was based on Thomas Paine's works.

Sure, most of them were Christians, but that's not to say that they weren't skeptics, too. Why is it that some Christians will say that you can't be a Christian unless you've been "born-again" but will gladly tell you that the founders were Christians because they belonged to a church? Belonging to a church means little - I belong to a certain church myself and do not subscribe to their view of reality.

But I digress. The fact is that this nation is built on action, not divine revelation. Perhaps if our President acted with reason instead of prayer, we would not be in the mess that we are right now.

Anonymous said...

Connor Obherst is one of the most enlightened song writters today. Do not show hatred towards his lyrics just because it goes against what you believe. Suck it up and enjoy hearing one of the greatest lyrisits of today perform. As for calling it garbage, I would hate to hear the crap that comes out of you're stereo.